Overview

The following report outlines the findings from a survey of ToolBank member organizations regarding their attitudes, economic and community outcomes as a result of utilizing the ToolBank tool lending service. The survey was developed by the ToolBank with support from the Johns Hopkins Baltimore Community Data Science class based upon the results of a pilot survey to high-frequency ToolBank member organizations. The survey contained 25 response fields and was available for members to complete from November 9th 2023 to November 17th 2023. ToolBank members were incentivized to participate by receiving a $25 tool credit for each completed survey, with the the first ten survey responses receiving an additional $25 tool credit. Multiple responses per organization were encouraged to allow for a diversity of experiences to be captured and each additional response per organization was provided a credit of an additional $10. The following sections outline the key findings from the survey; general sentiment stratified by years with the member organization, size of the member organization, and minority status of the member organization; the economic and community impact of the ToolBank, as indicated by respondents; and the impact of the ToolBank on Community Based Organizations’ self-reported fundraising capacity. The full project repository is available here: https://github.com/jhudsl/BCDS_ToolBank_2023.git.

Section 1: Key Findings

Section 2: Community Based Organization Attitudes Towards ToolBank Impact

Respondents were asked five questions to assess their attitudes towards the ToolBank’s impact on their organization and their community. Respondents were asked to rank their agreement with statements on a scale from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree, including options for neutral and not applicable. The statements included the following:

Figure 1: Respondent Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact

Table 1: Respondent Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact

Number, percentages of respondents to sentiment questions
#Strongly Agree (%) #Agree (%) #Neutral (%) #Disagree (%) #Strongly Disagree (%) #N/A (%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to purchasing or renting tools and equipment 42 (93.3%) 3 (6.7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to storing tools and equipment 26 (57.8%) 7 (15.6%) 7 (15.6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (11.1%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing staff time to complete maintenance/projects 19 (42.2%) 11 (24.4%) 8 (17.8%) 2 (4.4%) 0 (0%) 5 (11.1%)
the Tools made available through the TB allow our CBO to complete higher quality events/projects without additional funding 36 (80%) 7 (15.6%) 2 (4.4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO 42 (93.3%) 3 (6.7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Findings

Section 3: General Attitudes Stratified by Respondent and Community Based Organization (CBO) Characteristics

The following plots analyze the questions from section one above, stratified by the number of years that the respondent reported working at the CBO, the size of the CBO, and the minority status of the CBO. These plots explore if there is a relationship between these self-reported characteristics and the respondents’ attitudes towards the ToolBank’s economic and community impact.

General Attitudes Stratified by Respondent Years with the CBO

The following plots analyze the questions from section two, stratified by the number of years that the respondent reported working at the CBO. These plots explore if there is a relationship between respondents’ self-reported number of years with the CBO and their attitudes towards the ToolBank’s economic and community impact.

Figure 2: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBOs Costs Related to Purchasing and Renting Tools and Equipment, Stratified by Respondent Years with the CBO

Figure 3: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBOs Costs Related Storing Tools and Equipment, Stratified by Respondent Years with the CBO

Figure 4: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBOs Costs Related to Staff Time to Complete Community Projects, Stratified by Respondent Years with the CBO

Figure 5: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Has Positively Impacted Their CBO, Stratified by Respondent Years with the CBO

Findings

  • Respondents working with their organization for 3-5 years have slightly more positive opinion towards the TB, however this difference compared to other groups was not statistically significant

General Attitudes Stratified by Size of CBO

The following plots analyze the general attitude questions from section two, stratified by the size of the organization, as determined by their publicly available gross receipts. These plots explore if there is a relationship between the size of the funding available to the CBO and the respondents’ attitudes towards the ToolBank’s economic and community impact.

confirm size classification standards
Table 2: Number and Percentage of CBOs by Size
Number Respondents Percent of Total Respondents
CBO Size
  Less than 500k (group 1) 29 64.4%
  Between 500k and 1000k (group 2) 3 6.7%
  Greater than 1000k (group 3) 13 28.9%
  NA 0 0%

Figure 6: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBO’s Purchasing and Renting Costs, Stratified by CBO Size

Figure 7: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBOs Costs Related Storing Tools and Equipment, Stratified by, Stratified by CBO Size

Figure 8: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Reduced Their CBOs Costs Related to Staff Time to Complete Community Projects, Stratified by CBO Size

Figure 9: Respondent Agreement that the ToolBank Has Positively Impacted Their CBO, Stratified by CBO Size

Findings:

  • As the median size CBO group has a much smaller sample size, we cannot safely conclude that small or large CBOs have more positive attitude towards the TB in all aspects.

General Attitudes Stratified Minority Status

The following plots analyze the general attitude questions from section one, stratified by the minority status of the CBO, as determined by respondent self-report. For this survey, minority was defined as women, people of color, non-gender conforming individuals, LGBTQ+ individuals, and immigrants, and respondents were asked if they met one of more the following criteria: 1) the top executive position is held by a minority, 2) more than 50% of the board is made up of minorities, 3) more than 50% of program recipients are minorities, 4) none of the above. Respondents were able to select more than one of each criteria. The plots below explore if there is a relationship between the minority criteria of the CBO provided by the respondent and the respondents’ attitudes towards the ToolBank’s economic and community impact.

Table 3: Number, percentages of respondants indicating minority leadership
# Yes (% Yes) # No (% No)
Minority Leadership
  Our top executive position is held by a minority 25 (56%) 20 (44%)
  More than 50% of our board is made up of minorities 19 (42%) 26 (58%)
  More than 50% of program recipients are minorities 26 (58%) 19 (42%)
  None of the above 5 (11%) 40 (89%)

Figure 10: General Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact Among Respondents Reporting a Top Executive with Minority Status

Figure 11: General Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact Among Respondents Indicating More Than 50% of Program Recipients as Minorities

Figure 12: General Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact Among Respondents Indicating More Than 50% of CBO Board Members are Minorities

Figure 13: General Attitudes Toward ToolBank Impact Among Respondents Indicating Their CBO Did Not Meet Any of the Minority Status Criteria Provided

Findings:

  • Respondents’ attitude towards the TB are similar across organizations with different minority status. Part of the reason may be that respondents in these categories overlap with each other.
  • Attitudes of respondents from organizations with no minority status are more fluctuated, which is likely related to the small sample size for that group.

Section 4: Economic Benefit of the ToolBank

The following section analyses responses to the survey questions regarding the economic benefit of the ToolBank. For these questions, respondents were asked to provide their best estimates rounded to the nearest dollar. This section aimed to quantify the direct impact of the ToolBank on the member CBOs’ budgets and fundraising capabilities. This section asked respondents the following questions:

Note that the responses to all of the following questions in this section are highly skewed. As a result, we recommended reporting sum, medians, or quantiles rather than averages

Question: How much would you have spent purchasing or renting tools and equipment had the TB not existed?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   5028.889
2       Median   2000.000
3         Mode   2000.000
4           sd  14108.953
5 1st quantile    500.000
6 3rd quantile   3500.000
7          Sum 226300.000

Question: How much would you have spent on storage of tools and equipment had the TB not existed ?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   925.5556
2       Median   500.0000
3         Mode     0.0000
4           sd  1195.7606
5 1st quantile     0.0000
6 3rd quantile  1200.0000
7          Sum 41650.0000

Question: How much would you have spent on maintenance of tools and equipment had the TB not existed?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   816.6667
2       Median   300.0000
3         Mode   500.0000
4           sd  2227.4466
5 1st quantile    80.0000
6 3rd quantile   500.0000
7          Sum 36750.0000

Question: Reflecting on your events in the past year: If the TB did not exist, how much funding would your organization allocate to buying, storing, tracking and maintaining your own inventory of tools and equipment?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   2527.111
2       Median   1500.000
3         Mode   5000.000
4           sd   2532.100
5 1st quantile    800.000
6 3rd quantile   3000.000
7          Sum 113720.000

Question: number of total events hosted during last year

       Measure     Value
1         Mean  17.55556
2       Median   6.00000
3         Mode   3.00000
4           sd  25.65466
5 1st quantile   4.00000
6 3rd quantile  20.00000
7          Sum 790.00000

Question: If there were no TB, how many of your events in the past year would you not have been hosted for any reason?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   6.222222
2       Median   2.000000
3         Mode   0.000000
4           sd  15.597041
5 1st quantile   1.000000
6 3rd quantile   5.000000
7          Sum 280.000000

Extra analysis: percent of event not host during last year

  Measure     Value
1    Mean 0.4057342
2  Median 0.3500000
3    Mode 0.0000000

Questions: If there were no TB, how many of your constituents, including volunteers, members, and event attendees, would have been negatively impacted in the past year?

       Measure     Value
1         Mean  1306.444
2       Median   150.000
3         Mode   100.000
4           sd  3077.895
5 1st quantile    75.000
6 3rd quantile   500.000
7          Sum 58790.000

Impact on CBO if TB did not exists
Mean 25th quantile Median Mode 75th quantile Standard deviation Sum
Money That Would Have Been Spent if TB Did Not Exist*
  on Purchasing or renting tools and equipment 5029 500 2000 2000 3500 14109 226300
  on storage of tools and equipment 926 0 500 0 1200 1196 41650
  on maintenance of tools and equipment 817 80 300 500 500 2227 36750
  on buying, storing, tracking and maintaining own tool+equiptment inventory 2527 800 1500 5000 3000 2532 113720
# Events/People Impacted If TB Did Not Exist
  # events that would have been impossible in past year 6 1 2 0 5 16 280
  % of CBO’s total events that would have been impossible in past year 41 4 35 0 62 36 1826
  # constituents that would have been negatively impacted in the past year 1306 75 150 100 500 3078 58790
*in US dollars 
# A tibble: 1 × 1
  `Average % of a CBO's events possible through TB in past year`
                                                           <dbl>
1                                                           40.6

Findings:

Section 5: Community Impact of the Tool Bank

The following section summarizes the community impact of the ToolBank, as reported by survey respondents. This section aims to quantify the indirect ways that the ToolBank may impact CBOs and the community by reducing barriers and costs related to accessing tools and equipment. This section analyzes responded from the following survey questions:

Number and Percentage of Respondants Reporting Impacts of Funds Saved
# Respondents % Respondents
Accomplishments through money saved through TB
  Hired more staff 2 4.4%
  Hosted additional projects/events 27 60%
  Other 11 24.4%
Where funding would be cut if TB did not exist
  Cut staff funding 2 4.4%
  Cut project funding 26 57.8%
  Other 7 15.6%

Findings:

Section 6: Fundraising Impacts of the ToolBank

The following section aims to quantify the impact that the ToolBank may have on CBOs’ ability to host specific events, including fundraising. This section analyses the following survey questions:

Example: “We raised $20,000 at our annual fundraiser and hosted 150 people.”

Question: do organizations with higher savings through toolbank report more of a positive impact?

Question: How do savings vary by different toolbank offerings?

Question: Which of the following types of events have TB tools and equipment helped your CBO complete?

      choices frequency percentage
1    Quantity        25      0.556
2     Quality        35      0.778
3   Diversity         8      0.178
4 Consistency        30      0.667
5       other         2      0.044

                choices frequency percentage
1           Fundraising        14      0.311
2      Service Projects        34      0.756
3 Educational Workshops        15      0.333
4    Community Building        38      0.844
5                 other         6      0.133

Findings:

[1] 45
[1] 32.82222
[1] 30
[1] 28.83124
  0%  25%  50%  75% 100% 
   0   10   30   50  100

Findings: